In the United States? They certainly can, and “fired for lying about credentials” gives the employer a reason to contest unemployment. But apparently there are enough employers that don’t cross-check that it can work as a strategy.
I’m not sure how I feel about that. On one hand, I value honesty and want to see dishonesty deterred. OTOH…if you can do the job, what’s the point of having the degree as a checkbox on the job application? Bullshit metrics should be removed.
Alexander, is that you?
But in space its the only option you have
Hmm, this has me thinking about the stealth ships in The Expanse. The engineering needed to make it work makes me want to cry, but in principle you could run a Peltier cooler with a swappable heat sink.
To be clear, I don’t think this is a viable option, but it’s interesting to think about.
I lean towards discounting both rumors. I think the temptation to use said kill-switches would prove too great to resist, particularly for the authoritarian types involved.
We saw this a lot with provisions of the “PATRIOT Act”. It was championed as tools needed to combat terrorists and claimed to be reserved for such cases. In actuality, it was used to go after people running fan sites for sci-fi tv shows, among other things.
If such a kill switch existed in computer hardware, I’m sure it would have been used already. I’m less sure about a kill switch in the planes. On one hand, that’s a pretty situational tool, and you wouldn’t want to play that card until you really needed it.
OTOH, we didn’t hear about threats to throw the kill switch during the bluster over Greenland. If they had one, I think it would have been part of that bluster.
Because I’m not a sociopath. In this theoretical happily-ever-after dating app, I want to make people happy by connecting them with the right other people. Ongoing business comes from happy couples giving word of mouth recommendations to their friends and family, not from trying to lock in a misery subscription.
Maybe I’m old fashioned. I remember a time when capitalism meant “make money by doing something helpful for people” instead of rent-seeking bamboozle profits.
any kind of dating app is self-detrimental for revenue
It doesn’t have to be. In the US, about 4 million people turn 18 every year. Let’s say you get all of them signed up and all of them optimally paired off. You still have another 4 million new signups next year. Until the world falls off a demographic cliff, you’ve got an evergreen customer population.
That being said, the well is VERY poisoned at this point. The match group is a cancer on our society.
It’s just one of reddit’s autogenerated usernames. It looks like another post in this thread talks a bit about it.
Are they seeing a payoff or just not admitting defeat (yet)?
Yeah, I get that, like blocking should be an extreme step?
But for me it’s kind of a defensive measure. I feel political-flooded basically all the time online. There’s no respite, so I have to carve out what sanity I can.
Well, I block posters and communities pretty quickly when I see politics. I already feel like I have to add to that list way too much. Worse would be “I can’t even click Next without needing to block another one”.
I have mixed feelings.
On one hand, agreed @ wanting more variety in communities.
OTOH, Lemmy already has too much fucking politics. I don’t want whatever’s infecting reddit to become even MORE prevalent here. shudder
Oh, don’t misunderstand me. I’m not here to defend stack overflow or anything. They’re absolute rubbish as a company. I just thought your “third way” comment was misguided.
But - codidact went nowhere. Reddit and now lemmy have never been helpful for my programming problems. What’s taking SO down is their deal with the AI devil? It’s funny in sort of a sad way.
Like Lemmy? The site we’re all using?
Cute. Except Lemmy hasn’t helped me solve any programming problems. StackOverflow has.
And I think you missed my point, so I’ll restate it: If this theoretical middle-ground moderation were actually viable, it would have eaten StackOverflow’s lunch like a decade ago. People were SALTY about SO’s hostility even before the “summer of love” campaign in 2012.
deleted by creator
Well, no. If there were a middle ground, we’d all be using it.
Privacy may be dead as you suggest, but that doesn’t compel me to dance on its grave.
Eh, I don’t think it’s an outright scam, rather “just” a bad investment / overhype. The language model programs do have some real uses, after all.
I fail to see how AI can replace any given entry-level SE
You don’t “get it”?
AI is making senior software engineers more productive so they don’t need to hire more devs
Yes, I think you do.
I largely look at this as leadership using AI hype as an excuse to cut staff regardless of actual productivity. The house of cards hasn’t come down quite yet.
It doesn’t have to be a good implementation, it only has to be good enough for a demo to get the C-suite saying “Oh, slap a chatbot on there and then fire half the department that handles this now”.
IIRC that was because the Predator video feeds were intended to be viewed in-theatre by officers right there on the front, and military protocol around encryption keys would have made it so no one at the front would have been able to decrypt the feed.
Considering they were designed in the early 90s, i.e. before public-key cryptography took off with SSL, that explanation always seemed plausible to me.